Global Design Effort - CFS 10-15-09 CLIC 09 Workshop - WG 5 Technical Systems 1 CLIC 09 WORKSHOP Working Group 5 - Technical Systems ILC REBASELINE ILC

Global Design Effort - CFS

10-15-09 1CLIC 09 Workshop - WG 5 Technical Systems

CLIC 09 WORKSHOPWorking Group 5 - Technical Systems

ILC REBASELINE

ILC CONVENTIONAL FACILITIESAND SITING GROUP

V. Kuchler, J. Osborne, A Enomoto



Overview• Review of Conventional Facilities

Milestones• Main Linac Tunnel Configuration

Comparison• Update on Accelerator Design and

Integration (AD&I) Effort• Life Safety and Egress



CFS Responsibilities and Milestones• The ILC R&D Plan Provides Milestones for CFS

to Review Regarding Specific Aspects of the Reference Design to be Reviewed with

Respect to Value Engineering for the RDR Design

• The Accelerator Design and Integration Effort Is a Separate Overall Review of Alternatives to the Original RDR Design

• As a Result of the AD&I Process (Eliminating the Twin Tunnel Scheme in Favor of a Single Tunnel Design) Life Safety and Egress is

Also Being Reviewed as Part of the AD&I Process



CFS R&D Plan Milestone Status• Process Water Value Engineering

Completed• Alternative Tunnel Configuration

Preliminary Work was Completed by Hanson Engineering in July 2009

2-Day Workshop was Held at Fermilab on Aug 3-4, 2009 to Review Progress and Begin to Develop Cost Estimates

A Second 2-Day Workshop was Held at FNAL to Internally Review the Final Configuration Analysis and Cost Estimates on August 24-25, 2009 at Fermilab



CFS R&D Plan Milestone Status• Life Safety and Egress Global Document

Hughes and Associates has Reviewed the Alternative Tunnel Configurations and has Developed Life Safety and Egress Plans for Each Alternative

CLIC Document Is Complete XFEL Document has been Translated into English LHC Document is being Developed Asian Document has been Completed All Individual Documents will be Compiled into a Single

Comprehensive Document with an Executive Summary Which will Describe Commonalities and Distinctions in the Various Reports The Executive Summary will be Added to Complete the Document Prior to the AAP Review in January, 2010

• Surface Building Criteria Review Not Scheduled for Completion Until July, 2010



Main Linac Tunnel Configurations• Tunnel Cross Sections are Complete• Detailed Cost Estimates Based on the Americas Region

Criteria for Each Alternative are Complete



AD&I Progress to Date• The First Collaboration Wide ILC Accelerator Design and

Integration Meeting was Held at DESY on May 27-29 • The First Conventional Facilities and Siting (CFS) Group

Meeting was Held at SLAC on July 20-21• A Second Meeting is Planned at the Daresbury Laboratory,

UK on September 3-4• The ALCPG 09 Meeting, Held in Albuquerque NM on

Sept 28 – Oct 2, Also Devoted a Considerable Portion of the Agenda to the AD&I Effort

• The Final Collaboration Wide AD&I Meeting will be Held at DESY on Dec 2-3

• The AD&I Effort will Culminate in a Proposed Revised ILC Baseline Layout that will be Presented for Review to the ILC Accelerator Advisory Panel at Oxford on Jan 6-8



SB 2009 Working Assumptions (WA)



Progress on AD&I Central Region Layout• While All Area Systems were Affected by Some of the Alternate

Suggestions, Each Suggestion had a Definite Impact on the Conventional Facilities Layout

• New Criteria Regarding the Various Area System Design Changes was Needed from Each Area System in Order to Develop an Integrated Machine Layout

• The Weekly CFS Meeting has been Used for Direct Discussion with Area System Representatives to Finalize Area System Criteria and Layout Requirements

• Initial 2D Drawings are Being Prepared at FNAL with Consultant Support and will be Used as the Basis for the Revised Baseline Proposal

• 2D Drawings Consist of Overall Layouts, Larger and More Detailed Drawings of Specific Areas and Cross Sections Taken at

Various Points to Analyze Beamline Locations and Conflicts• 3D Layout Drawings are Beginning to be Prepared at CERN with

Efforts at FNAL and KEK to Follow






10-15-09 CLIC 09 Workshop - WG 5 Technical Systems 12

SB 2009 CFA WA Status• WA 1 – Dependent on Technical Decision• WA 2a & 2b

Americas Region - Klystron Cluster is Complete, DRFS Still to be Completed. Tunnel Diameter Still needs Optimization

European Region - Both Schemes are Being Worked on by Amberg Consulting Asian Region - Both Schemes have been Investigated. Cost estimates Need to be

Updated

• WA 3 – Undulator-Based e+ Source has been Incorporated into the New CFS Machine Layout

• WA 4 – Low Power Option is Reflected in the New Area System Criteria and CFS Machine Layout

• WA 5 – 3.2 km Damping Ring has been Incorporated into the New CFS Machine Layout

• WA 6 – Single Stage Bunch Compressor has been Incorporated into the RTML and New CFS Machine Layout

• WA 7 – Coordination of the Central Region Beam Layouts are Being Developed and will be Incorporated into the New CFS

Machine Layout. Specific Lattice Information is Still Needed



Current Status of Codes and Regulations• There are No Codes that Directly Address Underground

Accelerator Complexes• Most Initial Approaches Review Experience with Traffic

Tunnels and Their Associated Guidelines and Regulations for Designs

• Most Recognized Codes Evolve Over Time and are Revised, Based in Part, in Response to Fire and/or Catastrophic Failures

• But Traffic Tunnel Requirements are Based on Fuel Loads that Far Exceed Those Found in Actual Accelerator Installations (i.e. Gasoline, Diesel Fuel, Oil, etc.)



Current Regional Laboratory Approaches• Most Laboratories Rely on Examples from Previous Projects

to Develop Initial Criteria for Life Safety and Egress Design for a New Project

• This Initial Criteria is Then Supplemented by Consultant Review, Local Underground Codes where Available and Applicable as well as Regulations/Guidelines from Funding and Project Oversight Organizations

• While Most Regions do have Regulations that Directly Control Traffic Tunnel Design, in the Americas Region Two Distinct Codes have been Developed– NFPA 130-2007, Standard for Fixed Guideway Transit Systems– NFPA 520-2005, Standard for Subterranean Spaces

• It Should be Noted that All Codes are Subject to Interpretation



Current Regional Designs• Life Safety and Egress Issues and RF System Selection are

Two of the Major Drivers of Main Linac Tunnel Diameter• All Three Sample Sites have Developed a Life Safety and

Egress Design for the Main Linac Single Tunnel Alternative Based on Their Local Experience and Applicable Regional Regulations

• All Three Regions have Reviewed both RF Alternatives and Selected the More Appropriate Alternative to Develop

Their Regional Main LInac Tunnel Diameter• A Global Safety Document is Currently Being Developed that

will Gather Information from All Current Accelerator Projects, Including ILC, XFEL, CLIC, LHC and Project X, for Use as a Supporting Reference to any Current or Future Accelerator Design Project



Asian and European Design Approaches• Main Linac Single Tunnel is Divided into 500 m

Long Segments (i.e. Compartmentalization)• Firewall and Fire Doors Separate Adjacent

Segments• Ducted Transverse Ventilation is Used for Fresh

Air Supply and Return and Smoke Control and Exhaust• The European Region Uses the Klystron Cluster

RF System• The Asian Region Uses the Distributed RF System• Both Regions Currently Utilize a 5.2 m Main Linac

Tunnel Diameter



Americas Design Approach• Based on NFPA 520, the Main Linac Single Tunnel Must

be Divided into “Building” Space (i.e. Functional or Operation Space) and “Common” Space (i.e. Space Used Only for Exit Travel to the Surface)

• A 2 hr Firewall and 1-1/2 hr Fire Doors Must be Used to Separate the Two Spaces

• Alcoves are Also Required in the Common Space to Limit the Distance to an Exit or Area of Refuge to 610 m

• The Americas Region Currently Utilizes the Klystron Cluster RF System and a 5.0 m Main Linac Tunnel Diameter



Asian Region Tunnel Design



European Tunnel Design



European Tunnel Compartmentalization



Americas Region RDR and AD&I



Americas Areas of Refuge



Life Safety and Egress Summary• Each Region has Developed a Sample Site Solution that Satisfies

Local Life Safety and Egress Requirements Using Both Identified RF System Alternatives

• The Development of a Single, Cost Optimized, Uniform Design for All Three Regions is Simple not Possible

– Different Geology– Different Tunnel, Shaft and Cavern Construction Means and

Methods– Different Approaches to Life Safety and Egress– Preference of RF System

• Using the Regional Sample Site Approach for the ILC CFS Design Appears to be a Sensible Model for the Development of the TDR

• The Final Life Safety and Egress Design for the ILC Cannot be Completed Until a Specific Site is Chosen and an Approving Authority ahs been Established



Summary• The CFS Group is Making Good Progress on R&D

Plan Milestones and AD&I Efforts• The AD&I Baseline Proposal will be Completed and

Reviewed at the Oxford Meeting in Jan 2010• The CLIC/ILC Collaboration Efforts have

Fundamentally Contributed to the Efforts for the ILC RDR Alternative Review Process as well as the Efforts to Develop an Alternative Baseline Proposal and the Eventual Baseline Design for the ILC Technical Design Report Due to be Developed in 2012